SanctoH  Ubraiy 


^  Plain  and  Concise 

Explanation  of 


KNOWLEDGE 

IS 

POWER 


SCIENTIFIC . . 


SOCIALISM 


By  THOMAS  BERSFORD, 


He  who  shortens 
the  road  to 
Knowledge 
lengthens  life. 


Entered  According  to  Act  of  Congress, 
ill  the  year,  1899, 
In  the  office  of  the  Librarian  of  Con- 
gress at  Washington.  D.  C. 


Price  10  Cents 


Byron  Ring  Pub.  Cc,  22  Clay  St.,  S.  F. 


INDEX 


Page 

Definitions  of  Socialism - >> ^ 

What    is    Science..   .- > 5 

Inductive  and   Deductive   Method   of   Reasoning 6 

Dialectic  ^nd  Metaphysical    Reasoniilg 8 

Materialistic   Conception    of   History 10 

Class  Consciousness  and  the  Class  Struggle ig 

industrial  Evolutiotl *    .. , :2,^ 

tJtopian  and  Christian  Socialists,  etc. 26 

Human      Natute. .   ....   . .   * r 30 

Morals,  Ethics,  Rights,  etc 13 

Society  an  Organism 2^ 

Value,  Capital,  Wealth,  Surplus,  Value,  etc 34-37 

Summary  of  the  facts  of  Scientific  Socialism. .    . . 39 


A  Plain  and  Concise  Explanation  of 


SCIENTIFIC . . 


SOCIALISM 


By  THOMAS  BERSFORD, 

Author  of  *'A  Philosophy  of  Happiness." 


^^ 


Address  orders  for  this  book,  and  "A  Philosophy  of  Hap- 
piness" and  the  Derringer  Pocket  Book  of  Statistics  to  T. 
Bersford,  Labor  Bureau  Association,  915%  Market  Street,  San 
Francisco,  California. 


PREFACE. 

It  has  been  stated  that  though  millions  of  people 
play  at  chess,  there  are  but  few  real  ehe-ss  players.  A 
like  statement  miijht  be  made  of  Socialists,  for  though 
millions  of  votes  (the  total  Socialist  vote  of  all  coun- 
tries is  about  six  millions)  are  cast  for  Socialism,  there 
are  but  few  .scientific  Socialists  and  there  are  compara- ' 
tively  few  really  practical  scientific  works  upon  the 
subject  and  fewer  still  are  the  scientific  books  which 
the  average  working-man  can  understand.  The  So- 
cialist movement  is  essentially  a  working  class  move- 
ment, yet  those  three  masterpieces  of  Socialist  phil- 
osophy— The  Communist  Manifesto,  Socialism  from 
Utopia,  to  Science,  and  Capital,  abound  with  abstruse 
and  technical  terms,  which  are  not  merely  confusing, 
but  'are  positively  unintelligible  to  most  worldngmen. 

In  prepa'riing  the  followiing  pages,  my  object  was 
not  so  much  to  give  an  outline  of  Socialism,  as  to  help 
students  to  grasp  the  essence  of  larger  and  completer 
works  upon  the  subject. 

If  I  have  failed  in  this,  I  will  trj  again,  for  I  am  con- 
vinced that  when  a  propertiless  wage-worker  refuses 
to  believe  in  Socialism,  it  is  because  he  does  not  under- 
stand it;  the  fault  lies  not  with  the  principles,  but  with 
the  maniner  of  explaining  them.  I  have  endeavored  to 
combine  brevity  \^^ith  the  simplest  languiaige  so  as  to 
be  easily  understood  by  workinigmen.  I  am  aware 
that  in  this  endeavor,  elegance  is  often  sacrificed,  but 
beilieve  that  in  a  pamphlet  of  this  kind  absolute  clear- 
ness is  of  greater  impoirtance  thaai  elegaince  of 
lainguage. 

Some  of    the  definitions    given  a.re    my  own,     but 
I  think  they  will  be  acceptable  to  scientific  Socialists. 


WHAT  IS  MEANT  BY   SCIENTIFIC  SO- 
CIALISM. 


The  word  Socialism  is  ambiguous.  Used  in  one  sense 
it  means  the  phislosophy  or  doctrines  of  those  people 
who  advocate  oi  predict  a  Socialist  system;  used  in 
another  sense  Socialism  means  a  distinct  kind  of  so- 
cial system  or  state  of  society.  Thus  we  speak  of  the 
Patriarchal  system,  the  Feudal  system,  the  Capitalist 
system,  the  Socialist  system  or  Socialism. 

As  the  name  of  a  system,  Socialism  means  a  form  or 
state  of  society,  in  which  all  the  means  of  production 
and  distribut\>n  (i.  e.,  the  land,  tools,  railways,  factor- 
ies, stores,  etc.,  the  means  by  which  society  lives)  are 
operated  on  a  system  of  organized  national  labor  on 
the  basis  of  collective  or  common  ownership  of  the 
means  of  production  by  all  members  of  society  with 
democratic  management  or  control  by  the  workers 
themselves,  of  the  processes  of  production  and  distri- 
bution and  an  equitable  system  of  distributiom  of  the 
products  of  social  labor. 

This  is  the  ideal,  the  aim,  the  prediction  of  Social- 
ists. 

For  ages  men  have  thought  more  or  less  vaguely  of 
an  ideal  social  system.  In  all  generations,  from  the 
days  of  Plato  (who  wrote  of  atn  Ideal  Republic)  to  the 
pres<mt  day,  there  have  been  men  who  believed  in  and 
advocated  some  sort  of  a  co-operative  social  system; 
men  intuitively  recognize  that  somewhere  in  the  direc- 


tion  of  co-operation  and  democracy  the  greatest  bappi- 
ness  is  to  be  found.  But  notwithstanding  the  brillian- 
cy of  its  philosophers,  the  eloquence  of  its  agitatori, 
the  bravery  of  its  martyrs  and  heroes,  Socialism  is  still 
unrealized,  has  not  yet  triumphed,  and  this  fact  is  con- 
sidered, by  persons  who  have  not  studied  the  subject 
very  deeply,  a  proof  that  Socialism  never  can  prevail. 

But  the  statement  that  Socialism  is  one  of  those 
theories  which  sound  well,  but  prove  impracticable, 
wais  not  accepted  as  positive  proof  by  etarnest  think- 
ers, they  continued  to  philosophize,  continued  to  adTO- 
cate.  ''Look,  they  said,  the  advantages  of  co-operative 
industry  are  so  obvious — freedom  from  grasping  land- 
lords and  employers,  no  fear  of  want  and  worry  and 
cutting  competition,  but,  short  hours  of  labor,  leisure 
time  for  pleasure  and  study.  Economy,  fraternity, 
justice — all  these  are  to  be  found  in  a  co-operative  in- 
dustrial democracy!"  ""V\Tiy  could  not  the  people  see? 
Why  could  not  Socialism  be  brought  about?" 

The  scientific  Socialist  will  reply  that  it  was  be- 
cause the  economic  basis  of  such  a  system  did  not  ex- 
ist, but  the  superficial  opponent  will  usually  answer 
such  questions  by  saying:  It's  against  human  nature! 
Man  is  too  selfish,  etc.!  This  is  about  the  main  argu- 
ment of  miost  anti-Socialists,  and  certainly  if  man  be 
regarded  as  the  descendent  of  a  God-made  creature, 
perfect  in  form  and  mind,  he  cannot  be  considered  en- 
couraging; but  if  man  be  looked  upon  as  a  develop- 
ment, a  product  of  evolution,  not  merely  from  the  sav- 
age state,  but  from  the  lowest  form  of  life,  then  he 
not  only  arouses  admiration  and  encouragement,  but 
taxes  our  imagination  to  conceive  what  his  ultimate 
development  will  be. 


During  the  past  century  science  has  made  the  most 
miraculous  strides  and  thie  enormous  amount  'of  liter- 
ature issued  has  spread  knowledge  broadcast  over  the 
world. 

With  greater  knowledge  has  come  a  decided  spirit 
of  investigation  J  and  the  tendency  of  the  present  age 
is  to  be  scientific,  to  search  for  the  causes,  the  reasons 
why  and  wherefore.  Beautiful  ideals,  eloquence, 
philanthropic  motives,  these  meet  with  but  cold  re- 
ception from  science. 

How  often  scientific  men  are  heard  to  say:  "These 
are  your  theories;  what  are  your  FACTS?'' 

This,  then,  is  the  question  before  us.  WHAT  ARE 
THE  FACTS  OF  SCIENTIFIC  SOCIAL  rSM? 

In  addition  to  facts,  scientific  men  insist  upon  ex- 
plicit definition  of  terms  and  a  correct  method  of  rea- 
soning aind  before  we  proceed    further,  perhaps  it  is 
well  to  give  a  few  definitions: 
FACT  a  reality,  an  act  or  thing  accomplished. 
TRUTH  is  correct  statement  of  that  which  is  or  has 

been. 
SCIENCE  is  a  colleetion  of  established  facts  formed 
into  general  laws  for  the  purpose  of  establish- 
ing relation  between  cause  and  effect. 
SCIENTIFIC  means  according  to  science,  based  on  ac- 
tual knowledge  or  facts. 
REASONING  is  estimating  the  evidence,    comparing 

the  facts. 
ECONOMIC,  pertaining  to  the  production  and  distri- 
bution of  wealth. 
SYNTHESIS,  that  process  of  reasoning  in  which  we 
advance  by  a  regular  chain  from  principles  es- 
ta'blished  or  assnmed  and  propositions  already 
proved  until  we  arrive  at  a  conclusion. 


6 

It  is  yery  difficult  (as  every  logician  is  aware)  to 
state  even  what  we  know  to  be  facts,  in  such  lan- 
guage, that  their  truth  will  be  generally  acknowl- 
edged, for  people  view  things  from  different  stand- 
points and  they  do  not  all  use  the  same  mode  of 
reasoning,  nor  do  they  all  know  an  equal  number  of 
facts  (the prtincipal  differen-ce  between  the  scieintist  and 
the  unscientific  man  is  the  greater'  number  of  facts 
known  by  the  scientist).  Moreover,  many  things  which 
appear  to  be  self-evident  facts  (such  as  that  the  earth 
is  flat  or  that  the  sun  moves  round  the  earth),  have 
been  i>roved  by  science  to  be  illusions.  Yet,  all  the 
brilliant  and  learned  men  of  olden  times  believed  (so 
far  as  we  know)  that  the  earth  was  flat.  This  shows 
how  untrustworthy  is  our  judgment,  when  unaccom- 
panied by  actual  knowledge  of  the  facts. 

In  the  absence  of  actual  knowledge  we  advance 
theories  a,s  to  the  probable  causes  of  phenomena  and 
men  have  a  tendency  to  draw  upon  their  imaginations 
for  facts  to  suit  their  arguments,  and,  to  quote  an  old 
saying  "the  wish  is  often  father  to  the  thought."  Very 
often  an  argument  seems  quite  plausible  until  investi- 
gation proves  that  it  has  no  facts  to  support  it. 

Reasoning  to  be  effective  must  be  predicated  upo-n 
facts,  and  in  order  to  leave  as  little  as  possible  to 
mere  speculation,  when  constructing  hypotheses  or 
theories,  scientific  men  use 

THE  INDUCTIVE  METHOD  OF  REASONING. 

In  inductive  reasoning  we  start  with  known  facts 
and  make  inferences  from  them  and  by  adding  other 
facts  as  arguments  we  eliminate  as  much  as  possible 


the  element  of  uncertainty;  we  go  on  establishing 
facts  and  connecting  them  with  one  another  by  close 
relations.  It  is  the  chain  of  these  relations  which  con- 
stitute science. 

The  difference  between  inductive  and  deductive  rea- 
soning is  that:  in  induction  we' proceed  from  i'ndividual 
and  special  facts  to  a  hypothesis,  while  in  deduction 
we  start  with  a  hypothesis  or  theory  and  proceed  to 
apply  it  to  the  individual  and  special  facts. 

Of  course,  we  eainnot  reason  entirely  by  induction. 
When  investigating  a  given  theory  we  use  the  deduc- 
tive method;  we  analyze  and  compare  the  theory  with 
the  facts. 

The  method  used  in  philosophy  (by  modern  philoso- 
phers) is  "the  reduction  by  analysis  of  a  given  syn- 
thesis to  its  elementary  constituents,  in  order  to  recon- 
struct it  in  the  forms  of  abstract  thought  from  its 
primary  datum." 

An  induction  has  been  defined  as  a  legitimate  in- 
ference from  the  known  to  the  unknown.  When  we 
say  that  it  will  snow  in  say  Canada  during  the  win- 
ter, we  are  not  really  certain  that  it  will,  but  we  know 
that  it  always  has  in  the  past  and  we  therefore  infer 
that  it  will  again.  An  authority  on  logic  says  that, 
when  we  have  reason  to  think  that  any  instance  to 
the  contrary  would  be  known  to  us,  the  argument 
possesses  value  and  when  there  are  no  cases  to  the 
contrary,  no  stronger  argument  can  be  adduced. 

The  fact  is  that  in  all  reasoning,  we  must  make  as- 
sumptions which  may  theoretically  be  questioned  but 
of  the  truth  of  which  no  man  in  practice  entertains  the 
slightest  doubt. 


8 
DIALEOTIOAL    VS.    METAPHYSICAL    REASON- 
ING. 

The  inductive  method  will  not  insure  us  against  er- 
ror if  we  regard  facts  as  eternally  facts;  that  is,  if  we 
gratuitousiy  assume  that  a  statement  which  is  true  of 
a  thing  to-day  will  always  be  true;  for  instance,  in 
1.S12  a  naval  authority  declared  that  a  50-gun  frigate 
was  the  best  ship  for  all  round  naval  work,  and  pos- 
sibly it  was,  in  those  days,  but  we  know  that  a  ship  of 
that  sort  would  be  very  far  indeed  from  the  best  in  a 
modern  navy. 

Thus  w^e  see  that  what  was  once  true  of  this  ship,  is 
no  longer  true;  conditions  have  changed  and  the  ideas 
of  naval  men  have  had  to  change  with  the  conditions, 
for  the  crushing  defeat  of  slow  wooden  ships  by  fast 
ironclads  soon  compelled  a  change  of  opinion  in  re- 
gard to  ships;  yet  these  same  naval  men,  although 
they  fully  realize  that  ship  construction  is  constantly 
changing,  probably  fail  to  see  that  everything  else  is 
also  jn  process  of  evolution. 

Proba'bly  nothing  has  caused     more  confusion     in 
pnilosophy  than  the    metaphysical     way  of    viewing 
things. 
METAPHYSICS  views  things  as  fixed  and  apart  from 

processes  and  changes. 
DIALECTICS  views  everything  as  evolving,  as  being 
in  process  of  change;  that  is,  as  having  a  his- 
tory and  being  in  connection  with  other  things 
which  are  also  evolving. 
MATER  LV  LI  ST,  one  who  denies  the  existence  of  spir- 
itual substances  and  accounts  for  the  univerge 
by  matter  alane  or  matter  and  motion. 


9 

* 

IDEALIST,  one  who  idealizes  or  seeks  an  ideal  or 
ideal  conditions;  also  one  who  believes  in  ideal- 
ism. 
IDEALISM,  the  doctrine  that  the  real  is  of  the  nature 
of  thought;  that  all  reality  is  in  its  nature 
psychical. 
IDEOLOGIST,  one  who  fabricates  ideal  schemes,     a 

theorist. 
IDEOLOGY,  the  science  that  treats  of  the  history  of 
ideas. 
Science  has  demonstrated  that  all  organic  life  (i.  e., 
amimals,  (including  men)  Plants,  eftc,  every  form  of 
animal  and  vegetable  life),  is  the  product  of  evolution 
and  that  this  evolution  is  still  going  on.  The  evidence 
in  support  of  the  theory  of  evolution  is  so  conclusive 
that  no  person  of  any  attainment  in  the  world  of 
science,  now  (piestions  the  correctness  of  the  theory, 
but,  though  most  people  understand  what  is  meant  by 
the  word  Evolution,  very  few,  even  of  professional 
men,  I'ealize  the  full  significance  of  the  teachings  of 
evolution. 

To  many,  evolution  implies  nothing  more  than  the 
idea  tlipt  man  evolved  from  a  monkey;  that  since  be- 
coming ;i  man  he  has  made  no  further  change. 

It  is  hard  for  some  men  to  realize  that  they  are 
mortal ;  it  seems  harder  still  for  them  to  realize  that  a 
social  system  changes;  that,  like  a  human  being,  it  has 
birth,  growth,  decay,  and  dissolution. 

It  is  strange  that  men  who  live  in  the  great  modern 
cities  should  take  a  metaphysical  view  of  things,  but 
some  men  are  so  unobservant  and  such  creatures  of 
habit,  in  thought,  as  well  as  deed,  that  though  they 
see  the  most  miraculous  inventions  and  the  most  mar- 


10 

yeloiis  machines  introduced  almost  daily,  though  they 
see  the  incandescent  light,  the  hydraulic  elevator,  the 
electric  car  and  the  swift  ocean  steamer;  though  they 
»ee  the  gigantic  trust  develop  and  crush  the  smaller 
businesses  out  of  existence;  though  they  see  thousands 
of  men  displaced  by  machinery,  yet  they  fail  to  realize 
that  men  and  things  are  evolving,  that  conditions  are 
changing. 

MATERIALISTIC  CONCEPTION  OF  HISTORY. 

There  is  nothing  which  history  brings  out  more 
clearly  than  tlie  fact  that  man  constantly  changes  his 
customs,  his  laws  and  his  methods;  almost  any  school 
boy  can  describe  the  successive  changes  in  dress  and 
weapons;  first,  there  was  the  club,  the  stone  axe,  then 
the  sling  and  the  javelin,  then  the  bow  and  arro-w, 
then  steel  armor  with  sword  and  la'nce,  the  flint  lock 
musket,  the  percussion  lock,  the  repeating  rifle,  the 
automatic  Maxim  gun. 

The  hisftory  oif  man's  development  from  barbarism 
to  his  present  state  may  be  divided  into  four  stages: 
THE  HUNTING  STAGE,  in  which  he  lived  by  hunt- 
ing and  fishing  and  on  berries,  fruits,  etc. 
THE    PASTORAL    STAGE,    herding    goats,  swine, 

sheep,  etc. 
THE  AGRICULTURAL  STANCE,     when  man  settled 

down  and  tilled  the  soil. 
THE  MANUFACTURING  STAGE,  man  uses  machin- 
ery and  produces  goods  for  sale. 

All  development,  mental  and  material,  has  been  the 
direct  result  of  economic  progress;  so  long  as  man 
hunted  and  fished  for  food,  his  living  was  precarious; 
he  had  no  ti)>ae  to  think  or  study,  but  when  he  settled 


11 

down  and  tilled  the  soil  and  herded  goats,  sheep,  etc., 
his  food  was  more  certain;  he  then  had  time  to  think, 
and  from  that  point  begins  the  history  of  art,  science, 
and  mental  development  p:f^erally. 

To  fully  realize  that  mat  i**:il  and  economic  progress 
must  p'recede  intellectual  ]  ro^  ress,  we  have  only  to  re- 
flect upon  the  intellectual  development  of  savage  and 
semi-savage  races  and  we  find  that  their  mental  de- 
velopment is  in  precise  ratio  to  their  material  and 
economic  progress. 

TIk'  idealist  imagines  that  personal  conceptions  of 
wljat  ought  to  be,  etc.,  also  idea,s  of  virtue,  justice  and 
right,  w^ere  the  causes  of  man  becoming  civilized,  but 
histoi'v  shows  that  all  these  ideas  were  secondary  to 
economic  progress,  that  the  order  of  progress  was 
from  the  material  to  the  social  and  moral.  It  was  not 
until  man  found  it  paid  better  to  make  his  captives, 
.'slaves,  to  raise  food  and  things  for  him,  that  he  ceased 
1o  be  a  cannibal. 

He  used  to  kill  his  prisoners  and  eat  them,  but  when 
he  found  the  grea.t  advantages  of  keeping  slaves,  he 
discovered  that  cannibalism  w^as  immoral;  and  the 
same  is  true  of  chattel  slavery;  when  men  found  that 
Ihey  could  get  all  the  slaves  they  needed  by  simply 
owning  the  means  of  living  (land,  tools,  etc.),  then,  and 
not  till  then,  did  chattel  slavery  become  really  immor- 
al. 

It  can  be  demonstrated  mathematically  that  w^age 
workers  are  cheaper  to  the  capitalists  than  chattel 
slaves  could  be;  in  fact,  the  capitalist  system  could 
not  exist  with  chattel  slavery. 

It  is  evident  that  men  would  not  work  for  masters, 
except  by  compulsion. 


12 

Before  the  advent  of  machinery  any  man  could 
make  oir  procure  the  few  and  primitive  tools  then 
used  and  employ  himself,  therefore  THE  ONLY  WAY 
FOE  MEN  TO  LIVE  OFF  THE  WORKER'S  LABOR 
WAS  TO  OWN  THE  WORKER  himself;  the  worker 
was  then  kept  a  slave  by  physical  force.  But  when 
machinery  was  invented,  the  worker  without  capital 
was  unable  to  employ  himself  because  his  handmade 
products  were  undersold  by  machine-made  products; 
he  could  neither  compete  with  the  machinery  nor 
could  he  own  it;  it  was  too  costly  with  its  steam  pow- 
er, big  factories,  etc.  The  worker  then  had  to  go  to  the 
capitalist  and  beg  to  be  hired;  a  slave,  held  not  by 
chains  and  whips,  but  by  his  physical  needs,  food, 
clothing  and  shelter;  the  large  body  of  unemployed 
keeps  the  slaves  meek  and  willing. 

Our  capitalists  are  virtuous;  they  Siay  chattel  slav- 
ery i-s  immoral,  and  (they  might  add),  besides,  it  no 
longer  pays. 

The  history  of  mankind  since  the  days  of  primitive 
society  has  been  one  long  succession  of  struggles  be- 
tween the  exploiting  classes  and  the  slave  or  working 
classes. 

Karl  Marx,  its  brilliant  discoverer,  explains  the  ma- 
terialistic conception  of  history  in  the  following 
words:    The  conception  that 

"The  economic  structure  of  society  at  any  time  prev- 
alent constitutes  the  real  basis  and  explains  in  the 
last  instance  the  whole  superstructure  of  juridic  and 
political  institutions,  as  also  the  religiious,  philo'Siophic 
and  all  other  ideas  of  each  historic  period,  according- 
ly the  prime  causes  of  all  social  changes  and  political 
revolutions  are  to  be  traced,  not  to  the  ideas  of  meoi, 


13 

not  to  their  increasing  perception  of  eternal  truth  and 
justice,  but  to  the  changes  in  the  manner  of  produc- 
tion and  exchange;  they  are  to  be  traced  not  to  the 

philosophy,  but  to  the  economics  of  the  respective 
epochs." 

ETHICS,  EIGHTS,  JLTSTICE,  ETC. 

By  the  materialistic  conception  of  history  we  are  en^ 
abled  to  see  that  man's  conduct  toward  his  fellow- 
man  has  not  changed  or  improved  as  a  result  of  ethi- 
cal teaching,  but  that  ideas  of  right  conduct,  etc.,  have 
changed  with  the  changes  in  economic  conditions;  in 
other  words,  that  there  is  an  evolution  in  ideas  as 
well  as  in  material  thingp,  etc.,  and  "that  the  ideas 
prevalent  in  any  age  are  the  reflex  of  the  then  prevail- 
ing economic  conditions." 

The  person  who  denies  ihis  statement  must  prove 
that  the  same  ideas  of  justice,  morals,  rights,  etc., 
prevail  among  all  peoples  and  at  all  stages  of  history; 
this,  Vv^e  know,  cannot  be  done;  moreover,  we  know 
that  in  spite  of  the  ethical  teachings  of  Christianity 
and  other  religions,  immorality,  injustice  and  cruel 
wrong  still  prevail;  the  golden  rule  is  not  yet  in  oper- 
ation. The  fact  is,  however  loth  some  may  be  to  ad- 
mit it,  that  we  have  no  just  reason  to  doubt  that  all 
human  action  is  the  result  of  self-interest. 

Whether  it  be  directly,  in  self-gratification,  desire 
for  fajne  and  wealth,  or  indirectly,  through  benevol- 
ence, love,  or  in  pleasing  others;  whatever  form  it 
takes,  it  will  be  found  to  be  the  result  of  self-interest, 
and  men  will  pursue  this  self-interest  whether  it 
pleases  or  injures  others.  As  Hartley  said:  "With 
self  interest  man  must  begin,  he  may  end  in  self-anni- 


14 

hilatioii.'-  Of  course,  gross  selfishness  brings  its  own 
punishment  and  men  dare  not  be  too  brutal  for  fear 
of  their  neighbors,  for  only  persons  of  position  and 
power  can  practise  tyranny. 

We  find  that  sentiment  is  a  secondary  and  not  a 
primary^  cause  of  action.  Many  actions  which  ap- 
pear to  be  the  result  of  mere  sentiment  prove  on  in- 
vestigation to  be  caused  primarily  by  the  economic  in- 
terest of  some  person  or  class  of  persons ;  for  instance, 
the  sentiment  in  favor  of  free  coinage  of  silver  was 
largely  moulded  by  the  agitators  and  newspapers  paid 
by  the  silver  mine  owners,  who,  if  free  coinage  of  sil- 
ver were  established,  would  have  an  enormous  de- 
mand and  a  good  price  for  their  commodity  (silver). 

The  sentiment  against  negro  chattel  slavery  was 
largely  influenced  by  the  economic  interests  of  the 
merchants  and  manufacturers  of  the  northern  States; 
and,  in  addition  to  other  things,  the  workers  of  the 
northern  States  were  told  that  they  had  to  compete 
with  the  slave  labor  of  the  South,  that  this  was  the 
cause  of  low  wages,  and  if  slavery  were  abolished 
wages  would  go  up. 

Patriotic  sentiment  has  also  an  economic  founda- 
tion; it  pays  the  capitalists  to  mold  this  sentiment; 
the  workers  of  each  country  are  always  taught  that 
they  enjoy  greater  liberty  and  better  conditions  than 
the  workers  of  any  other  country. 

It  is  to  the  interest  of  the  capitalist  class,  not  only 
to  have  servants  and  slaves,  but  to  have  these  slaves 
contented  and  patriotic,  for  so  long  as  they  are  con- 
teoited  and  patriotic,  there  is  no  danger  of  the  slaves 
turning  upon  their  oppressors,  which  they  most  cer- 


15 

tainly  would  do  if  their  attention  was  not  kept    con- 
tinually distracted. 

A/lIusiions  are  frequently  made  by  speakers,  etc., 
to  Eights;  a  main's  natural  rights,  etc.  0;n  inyestiga- 
tion,  we  find  that  ideas  of  rights  vary  and  that  a  right 
means  nothing  more  than  that,  which,  in  the  opinion 
of  the  person  speaking,  wonld  be  just  and  in  accord- 
ance with  the  laws  which  he  pepsonally  thinks  ought 
to  prevail. 

If  we  base  our  arguments  upon  historic  conceptio'ns 
of  rights,  they  can  lead  to  nothing  but  endless  con- 
fusion, for  men  of  the  most  opposite  views  can  each 
quote  so-called  authorities  for  their  ideas  of  rights;  for 
instance,  the  divine  right  to  property,  the  divine  right 
of  kings,  and  yet  again,  the  divine  right  of  the  people, 
Vox  populi,  vox  Dei. 

Prof.  Holland  defines  a  right  as  "a  man's  capacity 
of  infiuencing  the  acts  of  another,  by  means  not  of  his 
own  strength,  but  of  the  opinion  or  the  force  of  so- 
ciety; a  legal  right  in  the  strictest  sense  is  a  capacity 
residing  in  one  man  of  controlling  with  the  assent  or 
assistance  of  the  state,  the  actions  of  others." 

The  fact  is  that  rights,  justice,  morals,  etc.,  are 
metaph^^sical  (i.  e.,  exist  in  the  mind  only);  they  are 
simply  what  jersons  or  classes  of  persons  choiose  to 
interpret  them.  Xow,  it  is  evident  that  the  ruling 
class  in  society  (controlling,  as  it  does,  the  sources  of 
education,  as  well  as  the  law-making  and  law-enforc- 
ing power)  will  always  interpret  rights,  etc.,  to  suit  its 
class  interest,  and  this  is  precisely  what  history  shows 
has  always  been  the  case,  for  as  Marx  expressed  it: 
"The  ruling  ideas  of  each  age  have  ever  been  the  idea« 
of  ^ts  ruling  class." 


16 

Mr.  Wm.  Lecky,  in  his  "History  of  Morals,"  points 
oat  that  when  the  Roman  slaves  were  few,  it  was  not 
considered  nioi  al  to  ill  treat  and  murder  them,  as  was 
done  when  the}  were  ni:']e  numerous;  also  that,  the 
Roman  Emperor?,  (who  .continually  apprehended  plots 
aj^ainst  their  Vivts  or  power),  encouraged  numerous 
spies  around  the  more  iniportant  of  their  subjects  and 
the  facility  with  which  slaves  could  discover  the  pro- 
ceedings of  thf^ir  masters,  inclined  the  Government  in 
their  favor  and  it  was  these  influences  which  altered 
the  legal  j^ositi-on  of  the  slaves  and  laws  against  wan- 
ton slaagliter  of  slaves  by  their  masters.  Strange  to 
say,  the  Emperor  Nero,  tiie  reputed  greatest  of  ty- 
rants, is  credited  with  passing  more  favorable  laws 
for  the  slaves  than  any  other  Roman  Emperor. 

History  shows  us  that  no  matter  how  often  the  ideas 
of  right  conduct,  etc.,  changed,  the  morals,  customs 
and  laws  in  force  were  always  those  of  the  then  ruling 
class,  whether  ihat  class  wa^  the  Patrician  of  ancient 
Rome,  the  Feudal  Barons  of  the  middle  ages  oir  the 
Capitalists  of  modern  times. 

Thus,  we  may  say,  that  morality,  etc.,  (i.  e.,  the  mor- 
ality that  is  general)  is  simply  that  code  or  line  of  con- 
duct wliich  the  ruling  class  in  society  finds  it  most 
convenient  to  establish,  and  which  it  possesses  the 
power  to  (;nforce;  in  short,  anything  is  right,  anything 
is  moi'al,  which  the  ruling  class  in  a  society  makes  a 
law  or  a  custom. 

Of  course,  when  we  imply  that  might  makes  right, 
we  are  speaking  of  classes  and  not  of  individual  per- 
sons. If  a  great  strong  bully  should  knock  a  weaker 
man  down  and  rob  him,  the  bully  would  be  arrested 
and  punished;  he  would  soon  find  that  it  is  the  might 


17 

or  brute  forct'  of  society,  tind  not  that  of  the  individ- 
ual, that  makes  right. 

Now,  as  hiws  and  ethical  opinions  are  the  reflex  of 
the  prevailing  economic  system,  and  as  the  nov^  pre- 
vailing economic  system  is  the  capitalist  system,  it 
lolk'ws  that  the  present  laws  are  capitalist  laws;  that 
i>,  laws  which  secure  the  capitalists  in  possession  of 
property  and  power;  and  capitalist  ethics;  that  is, 
ideas  of  right  conduct  based  on  the  right  of  the  capital- 
ist to  own  the  means  of  living  and  to  use  these  to  en- 
slave and  exploit  the  workers. 

The  capitalist  idea  of  ethical  behavior  on  the  part 
of  the  workers,  is  to  be  meek  and  fawning  to  your 
superiors.  To  be  industrious;  that  is,  to  work  early 
and  late,  and  be  a  toady.  To  be  ambitious,  that  is,  to  lie 
and  slander  in  order  to  get  ahead  of  your  fellow  work- 
ers in  the  opinion  of  your  boss.  To  be  enterprising; 
that  is,  to  take  advantage  of  the  necessities  of  others 
to  force  them  to  pay  more  than  the  market  price;  to 
get  a  monopoly,  ajid,  if  you  get  a  chance,  charge  a 
green  customer  a  dollar  extra;  in  short,  capitalist  eth' 
ies  tend  to  make  a  workman  become  a  liar,  a  slander- 
er, a  servile  slave,  a  sneaking  toady,  a  hypocrite  and 
a  thief. 

The  ruling  classes  of  the  various  epochs  have  al- 
ways ignored  the  rights  of  the  lower  classes  and  have 
never  made  any  concessions  to  them  unless  compelled 
to  do  so  either  by  physical  force  or  by  economic 
changes;  the  lower  classes  may  have  different  ideas  of 
rights,  etc.,  but  so  long  as  they  do  not  control  the  mili- 
tary force  of  society,  their  ideas  a.re  not  respected. 

Necessity  causes  changes  in  the  ideas  of  rights,  etc., 
and  when  ':'conomic  necessity  forces  a  revolution,  com- 


18 

pels  a  lower  class  to  rebel  and  establish  itself  as  rul- 
ing class,  ttieji  a  new  set  of  laws  and  morals  are  insti- 
tuted. 

Ilie  idealist  imagines  that  economic  conditions  are 
subordinate  to  ideas;  that  it  is  thorough  the  influences 
of  great  thinkers,  brilliant  and  noble  loaders  or  divine 
inspiration,  that  the  oooiditions  of  the  lower  class-^s 
have  been  imijroved.  The  evidence  before  us  does  not 
siijiport  this  llioory,  b\:it  points  distinctly  to  the  devel- 
opment of  machinery  and  improved  methods  of  pro- 
duction, as  the  cause  of  oericr  conditions. 

^Vhen  s-a^es  can  be  secured  without  force,  chains 
and  whips  are  unnecessary,  and  when  machinery  can 
do  the  work,  even  the  slaves  become  superfluous. 

The  truth  is  that,  until  we  obtain  a  mastery  over 
some  of  the  forces  of  nature  (i.  e.,  steam,  electricltv, 
etc.),  we  are  compelled  to  suit  our  ideas  to  our  condi- 
tions; wo  can  not  suit  our  conditions  to  our  ideas.  The 
sun  does  not  shine  because  we  want  to  work  by  day- 
lig"ht,  but  we  work  in  the  daytime  because  then  there 
is  light. 

So  long  as  the  tools  of  production  were  primitive, 
and  it  required  the  labor  of  the  greater  part  of  society 
to  j)roduce  the  necessaries  of  life,  it  was  natural  for 
the  crafty  and  the  strong  to  live  off  the  labor  of  the 
weak,  but  machinery  is  the  key  to  civilization,  the 
ojien  sesame  to  co-operative  life;  this  and  the  struggle 
between  the  w^arring  classes  of  society  brings  us  each 
year  a  little  nearer  to  the  altruistic  ideal,  for  the  last 
class  war  is  now  being  fought  and  the  signs  point  to 
the  workers  as  the  coming  ruling  class,  and  to  Social- 
ism as  the  coming  social  system.  For  the  first  time 
in  the  world's  history,  it  is  possible  to  establish  a  true 


19 

deni'ocracy,thatof  material  equality;  and  a  true  moral- 
ity, that  of  univ^ersal  co-operation. 

CLASS       CONSCIOUSNESS     AND     THE       CLASS 

STRUGGLE. 

CLASS  CONSCIOUSNESS  is  knowledge  of  the  fact 
that  individual  interest  is  best  subserved  by 
fiuthering  the  interest  of  the  entire  class,  of 
which  The  individual  is  a  member. 

Capitalists  are  clas/s  conscious;  they  make  and  sup- 
I>ort  laws  which  enable  them  to  exploit  the  working 
class  and  to  keep  that  class  in  ignorance  and  subjec- 
tion. 

A  class  conscious  workingman  is  one  who  realizes 
(1)  that  he  cam  better  his  condition  permanently,  only 
as  the  conditioTi  of  his  entire  class  is  bettered;  (2)  that 
the  workers  can  emancipate  themselves  only  by 
abolishing  entirely  the  exploiting  class  and  that  any 
political  scheme  which  stops  short  of  this  would  leave 
the  propertiless  still  dependent  upon  and  slaves  to 
those  w^ho  control  the  means  of  living. 

Class  consciousness  and  class  struggle  are  purely 
economic  terms;  they  imply  not  mere  social  distinction 
but  opposition  of  economic  interest. 

It  is  not  only  necessary  to  understand  what  is  meant 
by  class  consciousness;  it  is  very  necessary  to  know 
the  reason  why  Socialists  insist  so  strongly  upon  its 
being  taught  and  understood.  That  reason  is  this — 
THAT  ANY  CLASS  WHICH  DESIRES  TO  BETTER 
ITS  ECONOMIC  CONDITION  MUST  CONTROL 
THE  POLITICAL  POWER;  and  to  get  this  control  it 
must  make  a  united  class  conscious  movement. 


20 

To  prevent  the  movement  being  sidetracked,  it  is 
extremely  important  that  it  should  be  class  conscious 
as    oinly   by   a    recognition  of    identity  of  interest 
can  solidarity  be  secui'ed. 

In  connection  with  this  subject,  it  is  well  to  note 
how  thie  present  ruling  class  (the  capitalist  class)  de- 
veloped. The  modern  capitalists  are  the  successors  of 
the  old  Burgesses  or  freemen  of  the  cities.  So  long 
as  the  production  of  commodities  was  with  primitive 
tools  and  the  market  was  limited  to  the  local  town  or 
village,  these  Burgesses  were  simply  prosperous  work- 
ingmen;  but  with  the  development  of  commerce  with 
other  towns  and  with  foreign  countries,  the  invention 
of  machinery,  the  discovery  of  America,  etc.,  these 
Burgesses  became  rich.  But  they  were  still  under  the 
power  of  the  kings  and  barons,  and  these  kings  and 
barons  were  continually  extorting  wealth  from  them. 

In  oi'^er  to  emancipate  themselves,  the  capitalists 
hiad  to  capture  the  political  power,  but  they  could  not 
get  the  political  power  without  the  aid  of  the  work- 
ing class;  they,  therefore,  became  the  champions  of 
the  working  class;  they  educated  the  workers  on  the 
subject  of  rights  and  justice,  and  through  this  agita- 
tion the  workers  eventually  got  the  ballot.  After  the 
capitalists  had  wrested  political  power  from  the  Feud- 
al nobility,  etc.,  they  continued  to  use  the  votes  of  the 
workers  to  fight  other  capitalsts,  whose  interests  were 
opposed  to  their  own. 

Thus,  we  see  that  the  votes  of  the  workers  have  al- 
ways been  used,  not  to  free  the  workers,  but  to  fight 
the  enemies  of  the  capitalists. 

But  the  capitalists,  in  order  to  wrest  power  from 
kings  and  priests  and  Feudal  nobility,  educated    the 


21 

\^  oikeis.  and  the  workers  are  now  beginning  to  use 
the  same  weapon  to  overthrow  the  capitalists  that  the 
capitalists  used  in  overcoming  the  Feudal  nobility. 

Not  only  have  the  capitalists  forged  the  weapons 
which  will  eventually  destroy  them  as  a  class,  but 
they  have  also  brought  about  the  conditions  which  ab- 
solutely force  the  workers  to  use  these  weapons,  for  as 
machinery  increases  its  power,  fewer  and  fewer  men 
are  required;  the  proletariat  (propertiless  workers)  be- 
come absolute  paupers,  dependent  upon  charity;  now 
WHEN  AN  ECONOMIC  SYSTEM  WILL  NO  LONG- 
ER FEED  THE  PEOPLE,  THEY  ARE  COM- 
PELLED TO  COMBINE  AND  OVERTHROW  IT. 

It  is  evident  that  opposition  of  economic  interest 
must  result  in  opposition  of  political  views,  and  it  is 
also  evident  that  the  class  which  controls  the  political 
j'ower.  and  thereby  the  economic  forces,  is  enabled  to 
<'Xploit  the  other  classes,  and  with  the  wealth  it 
wrings  from  them  it  secures  luxury  and  education  and 
refinement,  and  it  is  the  possession  of  these  things  that 
Liakes  social  distinction. 

It  is  by  owning  their  means  of  living  that  capitalists 
i'ontrol  and  exploit  the  workers;  and  to  assert  that 
tliere  is  no  class  struggle  is  to  assert  that  the  worker 
and  his  emploj^er  have  the  same  economic  interest, 
which  is  an  absurdity,  as  we  all  know  that  it  is  to  the 
economic  interest  of  the  capitalist  to  pay  as  low  wages 
and  to  wring  as  much  profit  from  his  men  as  he  pos- 
sibly can,  while  the  worker  tries  to  get  as  much  wages 
for  as  little  work  as  possible.  The  utter  absurdity  of 
denying  the  class  struggle  becomes  at  once  apparent 
when  we  ask:  Has  the  slave  the  same  economic  inter- 


22 

est  as  his  master?  or,  has  the  parasite  identity  of  in- 
terest with  its  yictim? 

Once  the  worker  fully  realizes  that  it  is  not  scarcity 
of  food,  but  exploitation,  that  causes  poverty;  that  it 
is  the  ownership  of  the  means  of  living  by  capitalists 
that  causes  him  to  be  a  slave,  then  he  can  never  be 
misled  by  any  schemes  of  Single  Tax,  Free  Silver, 
Populism,  public  ownership  of  railways,  etc.,  all  of 
which  would  leave  him  still  in  the  power  of  the  capi- 
talists. He  sees  that  it  is  foolish  to  expect  the  rich 
to  work  for  his  emancipation;  the  rich  have  but  little 
to  gain  by  Soeialism;  under  Socialism  they  would  have 
liberty,  but  under  this  system  wealth  gives  them  privi- 
lege and  license  to  live  in  idle  luxury  and  debauchery, 
and  besides,  they  would  lose  the  power  and  distinctioo 
they  now  enjoy;  under  Socialism,  they  would  require 
merit  to  acquire  distinction;  but  now,  all  they  need 
is  wealth. 

A  w^orker  who  is  not  class  conscious  may  imagine 
that  the  public  ownership  of  railways,  gasworks,  etc., 
is  a  remedy  for  exploitation,  whereas  it  merely  means 
that  the  bondholders  are  making  use  of  the  Government 
to  exploit  the  people  and  by  reducing  taxes  and  expen- 
ses, enable  capitalists  to  reduce  wages  and  landlords  to 
increase  rents.  But  the  worker  who  is  class  con- 
scious can  see  that  exploitation  is  the  cause,  and  that 
it  is  not  to  his  interest  to  save  the  middle  class  ex- 
ploiters from  being  crushed  out  by  the  rich;  it  is  not 
to  his  interest  to  have  public  ownership  of  railways, 
etc.,  BY  A  CAPITALISTIOALLY  CONTROLLED 
STATE.  THE  WORKER  WOULD  BE  NO  BETTER 
OFF  IF  EXPLOITED  BY  THE  STATE  or  munici- 
pality, than  when  exploited  by  the  private  capitalist. 


23 

What  the  class  conscious  Socialist  wants  is  to  abolish 
exploitation  in  all  its  forms,  and  he  insists  upon  work- 
ers recognizing  that  they  cam  gain  nothing  of  value 
except  by  contix)lling  the  political  power. 

Political  power  gives  control  of  the  economic  power; 
it  is  therefore  the  key  to  emancipation  and  only  by 
political  action  on  class  conscious  lines  can  we  get 
possession  of  this  key.  To  assert  that  there  is  no 
class  struggle  is  to  show  utter  ignorance  of  the  subject 
or  gross  indifference  to  the  truth. 

INDUSTRIAL  EVOLUTION. 

Most  people,  even  anti-Socialists,  will  admit  that  in- 
dustrial methods  have  changed  and  are  still  changing. 
Previous  to  about  1750  the  tools  used  and  the  in- 
dustrial methods  in  vogue  were  but  very  little  better 
than  those  used  by  the  ancient  Romans. 

The  past  century  has  see^i  greater  industrial 
changes  than  all  the  previous  centuries  recorded  in 
history. 

In  the  18th  century — slow,  laborious  production  with 
primitive  tools  and  with  human  muscles  as  the 
motive  power. 
To-day — ^rapid  and  large  production  with  steam,  elec- 
tricity, etc.,  as  the  motive  power. 
Last  century — the  producers  toiled  in  their  little  work- 
shops. 
To-day — thousands  produce  together  in  gigantic  fac- 
tories and  foundries. 
Last  century — the  little  store,  the  little  farm,  the  small 

(financially)  proprietor. 
To-day — the  department  store,  the  Bonanza  farm,  the 
Gigantic  Trust. 


24 

What  honest  man  can  eontemplate  the  marvelous 
machines^ and  the  enormous  trust  orgunizations  of  to- 
day and  then  say  that  things  are  as  they  always  were? 

Now,  if  it  be  true  that  the  industrial  system  is 
evolving,  and  that  the  great  trusts  are  forming  the 
various  branches  of  industry  into  national  concerns, 
what  effect  will  it  have  upon  society?  What  will  be 
the  outcome  of  this  evolution?  If  not  Socialism, 
what? 
The  trusts  have  established  social  production  and  dis- 
tribution oin  a  national  basis  in  many  industries;  the 
next  step  is  social  ownershij)  of  the  means  of  produc- 
tion and  distribution,  for  to  the  owner  of  these  be- 
longs the  product. 

THE  WOKKERS  SOCIALLY  PRODUCE,  BUT 
THE  CAPITALISTS  INDIVIDUALLY  OWN  THE 
PRODUCT. 

The  development  of  trusts  renders  the  capitalists 
unnecessary;  they  become  mere  shareholders;  their 
only  function  being  to  take  profits;  their  former  work, 
that  of  superintendence,  etc.,  is  now  done  by  hired 
men  WHO  CAN  WORK  JUST  AS  WELL  FOR  THE 
STATE  as  for  the  company.  Thus,  the  trust  organ- 
izes and  fits  the  workers  for  the  future  Social iist  sys- 
tem. 

It  being  the  nature  of  evolutiom  to  eliminate  the 
unnecessary,  it  is  evident  that  the  capitalists  as  a 
class  are  doomed  to  extinction;  the  capitalist  mode  of 
production  disiplaces  labor  and  middlemen,  and  finally 
capitalists  themselves. 

That  Socialism  is  the  next  stage  of  social  evolution 
is  (so  far  as  logical  reasoning  can  prove)  certain;  that 
this  svstem  cannot  last  many  years  longer  is  equally 


25 

certain.  There  are  probably  at  this  moment  several 
million  unemployed  persons  in  the  United  States;  yet 
each  year  over  HALF  A  MILLION  CHILDREN 
LEAVE  SCHOOL  AND  ENTER  THE  LABOR  MAR- 
KET; each  year  more  and  moire  machinery  is  intro- 
duced—THE  LABOR  ARMY  CONSTANTLY  GROW- 
ING, YET  FEWER  WORKERS  REQUIRED  to  sup-  • 
ply  the  needs  of  society. 

It  will  not  be  many  years  before  the  unemployed 
will  be  so  numerous  that,  as  Marx  said,  the  capitalists 
will  have  to  dole  out  their  profits,  in  the  form  of  char- 
ity to  the  unemployed,  etc. 

Yes!  some  people  say,  "but  the  capitalist  system  is 

very  elastic;  it  may  last  foir  years  and  years  yet!" 

Now,  there  is  nothing  so  elastic  but  that  its  break- 
ing* point  can  be  reached.  The  elasticity  of  the  capi- 
talist system  is  of  course  its  power  of  adaptation;  the 
power  of  adaptation  is  limited  to  the  ability  to  exist 
at  all;  animal  and  social  organisms  are  capable  of 
coaisiderable  variatio'n,  but  when  the  process  of  adapt- 
ation has  reached  a  certain  point,  you  will  find  that 
the  animal  or  social  organism  is  no  longer  what  it 
originally  was,  a  time  comes  when  it  will  bear  no  re- 
semblance to  its  previous  self,  in  confoirming  to  chang- 
ing conditions,  the  organism  has  been  compelled  to 
change  its  nature;  the  change  has  been  imperceptible, 
but  it  is  complete.  So  with  our  present  system;  it  is 
changing  now,  but  most  people  are  blind  so  far  as 
economic  phenomena  are  concerned. 

AYe  are  rapidly  nearing  the  culmination  of  the  capi- 
talist system,  the  last  stage  will  be  traveled  in  a  much 
shorter  time  than  the  earlier  stages  were,  for,  as  Karl 
Marx  said,  "The  transformation  of  scattered  private 


26 

property  arising  from  industrial  labor  into  capitalist 
private  propetrty,  is  naturally  a  process  incomparably 
more  protracted,  violent  and  difficult,  than  the  trans- 
formation of  capitalist  private  property,  already 
practically  resting  o»n  socialized  production,  into  so- 
cialized property.  In  the  former  cases  we  had  the 
expropriation  of  the  masses  of  the  people  by  a  few 
usurj>ers;  in  the  latter,  we  have  the  expropriation  of 
a  few  usurpers  by  the  masses  of  the  people." 

UTOPIANS,  CHRISTIAN  SOCIALISTS,     GOOD 

MEN,  ETC. 

To  the  Utopian  Socialist — Socialism  is  not  a  stage 
of  evolution  but  is  a  personal  conception,  the  brilliant 
idea  of  some  genius;  the  Utopian  thinks  Socialism  is 
to  be  brought  about,  not  by  the  complete  overthrow 
of  the  capitalist  class  through  a  political  struggle,  but, 
by  teaching  people  how  to  co-operate,  etc. 

The  Christian  Socialists  imagine  that  better  condi- 
tions for  tire  workers  can  be  brought  about  by  ethical 
teaching,  by  making  good  men,  voting  for  good  men, 
etc. 

To  prcne  that  religious  teaching  affects  the  matter, 
the  Christian  Socialist  must  prove  that  religious  men 
are  not  profit  takers,  that  they  take  nothing  without 
giving  am  equivalent. 

It  is  well  known  that  Mr.  Rockefeller,  Mr.  Wana- 
maker  amd  other  great  monopolists  are  quite  religious. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Athiest,  in  order  to  show 
that  religion  is  (as  some  claim)  the  cause  of  social 
misery,  must  prove  that  freedom  from  religious  be- 
lief makes  men  just. 


27 

Men's  conduct  toward  each  other  is  determined 
primarily,  not  by  moral  teachings,  but  by  their  eco- 
nomic relations,  it  is  impossible  for  men  to  be  frater- 
nal when  their  interests  clash  and  mere  ethical  teach- 
ing will  not  prevent  their  interests  clashing. 

The  futility  of  ethical  teaching  without  improving 
conditions  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  most  criminals 
profess  religion;  out  of  1,319  crimiinals  at  Joliet,  825 
had  a  common  school  education,  90  had  a  cdllegiate 
education,  only  286  were  intemperate,  960  were 
Americans  and  only  216  were  without  religious  be- 
lief. It  thus  appears  that  neither  illiteracy,  in- 
tern perance,  nor  want  of  religious  teaching  was  the 
cause  of  their  crimes,  and  as  regards  men  being  nat- 
urally bad,  Mr.  D.  G.  Ritchie  says:  "If  acquired 
characters  (bodily  or  mental)  were  transmissible, 
breeders  would  surely  have  made  use  of  the  fact, 
whereas  whatever  theories  they  may  have,  they  have 
depended  entirely  in  practice  on  the  judicious  pairing 
of  sires  and  dams. 

If  you  declare  that  Socialism  can  come  only  by 
having  t'ood  men,  you  imply  that  it  will  never  come, 
because  it  can  be  conclusively  proved  tbat  good  men 
can  come  only  through  good  conditions,  it  is  environ- 
ment that  shapes  the  man. 

The  workers  can  better  tlieir  environment  only  by  an 
uncompromising  class  conscious  movement. 

To  appeal  to  sense  of  justice,  to  trust  to  ethical 
teaching  of  the  christian  sort  is  simply  to  ask  the 
capitalists  to  voluntarily  resign  their  plunder.  Does 
history  furnish  any  event  to  justify  the  belief  that 
they  will  do  so? 

^ATiether  intentionally  or  not,  advocates  of  such  ap- 


28 

peals  act  as  allies  of  the  capitalist  class,  even  as  a 
wife  miy,  by  throwing  her  arms  around  her  husband, 
prevent  him  from  defending  himself,  so  these  people 
confuse  the  workers  and  retard  their  organization,  and 
be  their  intentions  good  or  evil,  misleaders  and  false 
teachers  an^  tlie  enemies  of  the  people. 

TJtapians,  Christian  Soicialiists,  Theosiophists,  etc.,  tell 
us  that  we  should  be  brotherly  and  have  consideration 
for  the  capitalists;  they  siay  "there's  no  real  class  an- 
tagonism; it's  all  due  to  ignorance,  etc.'' 

"Oh  no !  there's  no  class  struggle,  there's  mo  opposi- 
tion of  iiit(M'est.  It  is  not  to  the  interest  of  the  capita- 
list to  get  all  he  can  out  of  labor;  it  is  not  to  the  in- 
terest of  the  workeir  to  get  as  much  wages  for  as  little 
work  as  ]T0ssible.  The  reason  the  workers  starve  in 
the  midst  of  plenty  or  drudge  their  lives  away  for  a 
beggarly  j)ittance,  is  not  because  they  are  exploited 
slaves,  it  is  simply  because  the  capitalists  are  ignor- 
ant." 

We  must  not  say  there's  a  class  struggle,  it  sounds 
too  harsh ;  no,  we  must  be  considerate  and  brotherly ; 
in  short  we  should  tell  lies,  we  should  deny  facts,  we 
should  kiss  the  oppressor  and  the  thief,  we  should 
pander  to  wrong  and  injustice,  we  should  smile  at 
falsehood  and  give  truth  a  stab  in  the  back. 

Scientific  Socialists  insist  that  class  eonsciousness 
is  fundamentally  necessary.  One  would  think  that 
the  workers,  suffering  as  they  do,  would  be  naturally 
class  conscious,  but  so  many  influences  coinspire  to 
keep  Ihem  ignorant,  we  must  remember  that  they  are 
taught  capitalist  ideas  and  receive  capitalist  educa- 
tion, moreover  the  many  political  schemes,     such  as 


29 

r^*(vt'jction,  free  silver,  single  tax,  public  ownership  of 
railways,  etc.,  all  help  to  confuse  the  worker. 

It  seemt-  extremely  difficult  for  the  average  man  to 
realize  that  none  of  these  schemes  would  better  the 
condition  of  the  w^orking  class,  yet  this  can  be  easily 
proved,  for  wages  being  always  relative  to  the  cost  of 
living,  if  Ihe  cost  of  living  be  reduced  the  wages  will 
be  likewise  reduced  through  the  continuous  competi- 
tion, of  the  unemployed,  for  work.  The  single  tax 
scheme  would  not  furnish  employment  because  to 
employ  himself  a  man  must  produce  something  that 
will  sell,  in  order  to  pay  his  taxes,  etc.,  we  already  pro- 
duce more  than  can  be  sold,  moreover  small  production 
is  being  crushed  out,  it  cannot  produce  cheaply,  only 
men  ^vith  large  capital  and  the  best  machinery,  etc., 
can  make  productiion  profitable. 

IF  WAGE  WORKERS  COULD  SEE  THAT  THE 
REASON  MEN  STARVE,  IS  NOT  BECAUSE  THERE 
IS  FAMINE,  BUT  BECAUSE  THE  ABUNDANCE 
IS  POSSESSED  BY  THE  RICH;  AND  THAT  WE 
WORK  LONG  HOURS,  NOT  BECAUSE  IT  IS 
NECESSARY,  BUT  BECAUSE  THE  PRESENT  AN- 
ARCHISTIC COMPETITIVE  SYSTEM  CAUSES  A 
TREMENDOUS  WASTE  OF  LABOR;  IF  THE 
WORKERS  COULD  ONLY  SEE  THIS,  THEN  THEY 
WOULD  SOON  UNDERSTAND  WHY  SOCIALISTS 
MAINTAIN  THAT  THE  W^ORKING  CLASS  CAN 
GET  NOTHING  OF  REAL  BENEFIT,  UNTIL  IT 
OAPTURES  THE  POLITICAL  POWER. 

None  of  the  Populist  middle  class  and  direct  legis- 
latiom  schemes  can  better  the  conditions  of  the  work- 
ing class. 

Of  what  value  would  the  initiative  and  referendum 


30 

be  to  people  who  do  not  know  their  class  interest, 
they  are  moire  than  likely  to  u&e  these  weapons  to 
their  own  detriment;  this  is  the  reason  scientific  So- 
cialists attach  no  importance  to  the  initiative  and 
referendum  until  a  sufficient  number  of  people  under- 
stand Socialism. 

HUMAN  NATURE. 

The  trouble  with  Utopians,  etc.,  is  that  they  take 
no  cognizance  of  Evolution.  When  they  first  read 
"Looking  Backward"  (or  some  similar  book)  they  be- 
come enraptured  with  Socialism,  they  speak  to  their 
friends  about  it  and  get  into  disputes,  and  ais  their 
conception  of  Socialism  is  entirely  Utopian,  they  find 
themselves  unable  to  meet  the  arguments  of  their  op- 
ponents. Having  no  scientific  basis  for  their  belief 
they  cam  be  easily  beaten  in  debate ;  arnd  the  cynical  ajl- 
lusiotns  to  human  nature,  man's  natural  selfishoiess  and 
that  so'rt  of  thing,  compels  them  to  reluctantly  give 
up  their  SociaJMsm  and  to  regard  it  merely  as  a  beauti- 
ful dream. 

Now  history  shows  that  what  is  termed  Human 
nature  (i.  e.  ideas,  tastes,  dispositions,  etc.),  is  a  very 
variable  compound.  We  all  know  how  widely  indi- 
vidual tastes  differ  and  how  different  are  the  various 
ideals  of  the  beautiful. 

To  a  Socialist  speaking  on  the  street  to  a  crowd  of 
stolid  or  sneering  workmen,  there  is  probably  nothing 
more  beautiful  than  the  gleam  of  intelligence  in  the 
e^^es  of  a  sympathizer  or  brother  Socialist,  but  of 
course  a  sculptor  or  artist  would  have  a  different  ideal 
of  the  beautiful. 


31 

We  find  that  Human  nature  differs  in  ever}'  country 
and  in  every  age  and  always  takes  shape  from  the 
I)revailing  mode  of  economic  production.  It  was 
otnce  human  nature  to  eat  one's  fellowmen.  It  was 
once  human  nature  for  all  free  men  to  go  armed  and 
take  immediate  personal  action  to  redress  wrongs, 
etc.,  and  to  engage  in  family  feuds  and  duels. 

When  the  Socialist  system  prevails,  the  average  per- 
son will  then  probably  dcclarii  that  it  is  mot  human 
nature  for  men  to  comj^ete  in  business. 

How  closely  related  ideas  are  to  conditions,  is 
shown  by  the  effects  of  the  introduction  of  machinery; 
before  its  introduction  very  few  people  indeed  thought 
of  collective  ownership,  for  so  long  as  the  tools  were 
simple,  the  worker  could  own  them  and  employ  him- 
self, and  private  ownership  was  then  considered  right, 
for  by  owning  the  tools  it  guaranteed  the  product  to 
its  producer,  but  when  machinery  was  introduced,  the 
worker  could  no  longer  employ  himself,  he  therefore 
had  to  work  for  the  owner  of  the  machinery.  The 
worker  then  found  that  though  he  was  still  one  of 
the  producers,  he  could  not  own  the  product  of  hii 
labor,  that  this  belonged  to  the  owner  of  the  ma- 
chinery who  gave  the  w^orkers  only  a  portion  of  the 
product  in  the  shape  of  w^ages. 

When  the  workers  fully  realized  that  production 
was  no  longer  individual  but  social,  hundreds  of  men 
w^orking  together  in  one  factory,  etc.,  and  that  private 
ownership  of  the  tools  of  production  no  longer  guar- 
anteed the  product  to  its  producers,  but  instead  meant 
profits  for  capitalists  and  wages  for  producers,  then, 
and  not  till  then  did  the  idea  of  collective  ownership 
of  the  tools  of  production  take  definite  shape,  they 


32 

began  to  see  the  coDtradiction  between  the  method  of 
production  and  the  method  of  appropriation  of  the 
product,  for  while  the  product  is  giocially  produced, 
the  individual  capitalist  appropriates  it. 

Social  production  thus  forces  the  idea  of  social 
ownership  of  the  means  of  production. 

Who  would  have  thought  of  advocating  public 
ownership  of  sitage  coaches?  Probably  no  one;  but 
when  railways  supersede  the  stage  coaches  and  mo- 
nopolies extort  tribute,  tlie  sentiment  in  favor  of 
public  ownership  becomes  very  pronounced.  A  few 
years  hence  will  probably  see  all  industries  in  the 
hands  of  trusts  and  monopolies  and  soon  as  a  great 
tr'ist  i.'ontrols  tlie  bread  and  groceries  of  the  people, 

there  will  be  a  great  clamor  for  public  ownership  of 
these  monopolies.     Social  interest  begets     desire  for 

t^ocial  ownership. 

Public  sentiment  changes  with  changing  conditions; 
ideas  that  are  considered  radical  to-day  will  be 
deemed  conservative  to-morrow.  Man}^  of  the  musty 
superstitons  of  the  past  are  already  swept  away  and 
soon  they  will  be  followed  by  that  greatest  of  super- 
stitions, the  belief  that  society  cannot  exist  unless 
private  capitalists  control  its  means  of  living. 

It  being  human  natui^  to  look  after  one's  economic 
interest,  it  is  evident  that  huma^n  nature  wdll  not 
prove  an  oibstacle  to  the  advent  of  Soeialism  w^hen 
economic  conditions  become  unbearable  and  it  be- 
comes obvious  that  Socialism  is  the  remedy.  Socialism 

will  become  a  necessity  through  the  natural  evolution 
of  industry,  the  unconscious  action  of  economic  forces 
causing  a  conscious  action  on  the  part  of  the  people 
when  forced  by  their  economic  needs,  and     the    fact 


33 

that  the  oonoentration  of  wealth  puts  a>n  end  to  the 
private  property  of  the  vast  majority  of  people,  make* 
th^m  the  more  ready  to  advocate  social  ownership. 

THE  SOCIAL  ORGANISM. 

Socialists  maintain  that  society  is  not  a  mere  ag- 
gregate of  individuals,  but  is  an  organism  of  interde- 
pendent parts.  Darwin,  Huxley,  Spencer,  Bain,  and 
other  great  scientists  are  alike  agreed  upon  this,  but 
many  persons  believe  that  men  are  naturally  a^ntago- 
nistic,  that  their  interests  must  niecessarily  clash, 
that  Government  must  necessarily  be  despotic. 

Now  it  is  evident  that  if  Government  were  despotic 
to  all  men,  it  would  be  speedily  abolished;  investijzi- 
tion  soon  shows  us  that  the  reason  Government  is 
despotic  to  the  lower  classes,  is  the  simple  fact  that 
it  is  the  tool  of  the  ruling  class,  as  Marx  said:  "It  is 
the  committee  for  managing  the  common  affairs  of 
the  ruling  class." 

.\'S  for  antagonism,  the  interests  of  employer  a^nd 
emploj^ee,  foreman  and  man,  business  man  and  rival, 
are  diametrically  opposed;  how  is  it  possible  for 
them  to  be  fraternal?  It  is  not  man's  nature,  but  the 
competitive  system,  that  is  at  fault  in  this  matter. 

Men  are  simply  what  the  social  system  makes  them. 
In  primitive  society  there  was  no  place  for  philoso- 
phers and  poets,  only  hunters  and  warriors  were  re- 
quired. In  the  present  competitive  system  a  place 
can  be  found  only  for  good  business  men,  that  is,  good 
smooth  hypocrites,  grasping  usurers,  merciless,  grind- 
ing taskmasters,  double  dealing  thieves,  these  are  the 
fittest  for  the  competitive  system,  and  they     survive, 


34 

while  tbousands  of  honest  men  are  denied  an  opportu- 
nity to  earn  a  living.  If  a  man  be  a  pugnacious  pugi- 
list, a  tatooed  freak  or  a  hideous  human  monstrosity^ 
he  is  sure  to  receive  a  good  income,  but  a  brilliant 
philosopher  (if  poor)  would  die  of  starvation  unless 
the  capitalists  could  make  profit  out  of  him. 

But  though  the  management  of  society  is  not     at 
present  what  it  should  be,  still  even  now,    it    gives 
more  freedom  than  it  takes  away.     The  man  outside 
society  would  be  a  slave  to  nature,  perpetually  drudg- 
ing with  primitive  tools  to  eke  out  a  living. 

Liberty  for  (development  and  self  realization    does 
not  exist  apart  from  society. 

Aristotle  in  his  discourse  on  Politics  said:  "The 
State  is  by  nature  clearly  prior  to  the  individual  and 
to  the  family,  since  the  whole  is  necessarily  prior  to 
the  part,  the  proof  that  the  State  is  a  creature  of  na- 
ture and  prior  to  the  individual  is,  that  the  individual 
when  isiolated  is  not  self-sufficing  and  therefor  is 
like  a  part  in  relation  to  the  whole.  But  he  who  is  un- 
able to  live  in  society  or  who  has  no  need  because  he  is 
sufficient  unto  himself  must  be  either  a  Beast  or  a 
God." 

VALUE,  SURPLUS  VALUE,     CAPITAL,    MONEY, 

ETC. 

EXCHANGE  VALUE,  that  for  which  on  the  aver- 
age a  commodity  exchanges  and  is  determined 
by  the  quantity  of  Socially  necessary  labor  time 
embodied  in  the  commodity. 

USE  VALUE,  the  useful  properties  of  a  tiling.  A 
use  value  does  not  necessarily  have   exchange 


35 

value,  but  to  have  exchange  vaiue  a  thing  must 
have  utiriy. 

SURPLUS  VALUE,  crystalized  unpaid  labor;  that 
part  of  the  products  of  hibor  which  is  appro- 
priated by  the  capitalist. 

PROFIT,  that  part  of  the  surplus  value  which  is  left 
to  the  capitalist  after  dividing  up  with  the  land- 
lords, tax  collectors,  railway  companies,  etc. 

COMMODITIES,  things  which  have  a  market  value, 

i.  e.,  are  bought  and  sold  publicly. 

WEALTH,  an  accumulatioin  of  oommiodities  and  use 
values,  not  commodities. 

CAPITAL,  aggregate  products  of  labor  (inc hiding 
money)  approrpriated  by  the  capitalists  and  used 
for  the  production  of  more  wealth. 

CONSTANT  CAPITAL,  the  raw  materials,  buildings, 
machinery,  plant,  etc. 

VARIABLE  CAPITAL,  the  amount  paid  in  wages;  it 
is  called  variable  because  in  addition  to  repro- 
ducing its  own  equivalent,  it  produces  a  sur- 
plus. 

CAPITALIST,  a  person  who  owns  or  controls  such  an 
amount  of  capital  that  his  economic  interest  lies 
with  the  capitalist  class. 

PRICE,  the  money  name  or  expression  of  value.  Be 
careful  to  note  that  a  thing  may  have  a  price 
placed  upon  it  without  having  exchange  value. 

MONEY,  is  the  universal  equivalent  of  commodity 
values,  it  is  the  commodity  which  is  used  as  the 
measure  of  value  and  the  standard  of  price, 
(standard  of  value ).  It  is  the  measure  of  value 
inasmuch  as  it  is  the  socially  recognized  in- 
carnation of  human  labor;  it  is  the  standard  ef 


3G 

price,  iDasinuch  as  it  is  a  fixed  weight  of  metal, 
as  the  measure  of  value  it  serves  to  convert  the 
values  of  all  the  manifold  commodities  into 
prices  into  imagimary  quantities  of  gold;  as  the 
standard  of  price  it  measures  those  quantities 
of  gold. 

"Money  is  itself  a  commodity  and  like  either  com- 
modities its  value  is  determined  by  the  amount  of  ab- 
stract human  labor  incorporated  in  it,  it  is  therefore 
value  itself  and  from  its  nature  cr.n  be  us?'d  as  the 
universal  measure  of  values.  A  change  in  the  value 
of  gold  affects  all  commodities  similarly,  a'nd  it  still 
remains  their  universal  equivalent  because  the  rela- 
tive value  of  commodities  remains  unaltered,  two 
changes  only  can  result,  commodities  may  rise  in  value 
— money  remaining  the  same,  or  money  may  fall  in 
value  and  commodities  remain  constant." — Marx. 

"The  truth  is  that  though  gold  and  silver  are 
not  by  nature  money,  money  is  by  nature  gold  and 
silver." 

"The  fact  that  money  can  in  certain  functions  be 
replaced  by  symbols,(i.  e.,  Dollar  Bills  so-called  paper 
money,  etc.),  of  itself  gave  rise  to  the  mistaken  notiion 
that  money  itself  was  a  mere  symbol."     Marx.     - 

Many  persons  imagine  that  prices  are  regulated  by 
the  amount  of  money  in  circulation.  Marx  shows  that 
the  reverse  is  true,  viz.,  that  the  amount  of  money  in 
circulation  is  determined  by  the  prices  of  commodi- 
ties in  the  market  divided  by  the  number  of  changes 
of  places  made  in  the  time  by  coins  of  the  same  de- 
nomination. 

Labor  power  (mental  and  physical)  is  a  commodity 
its  exchange  value  is  determined  primarily  by  its  coat 


37 

of  production,  i.  e.,  the  amount  required  to  enabl'e  the 
laborer  to  live  and  i^eproduce  his  species;  this  amount 
varies  accoi'ding  to  the  standards  and  economic  con- 
ditions of  the  various  countries. 

The  exchange  value  of  labor  is  what  it  sells  for; 
(i.  e.,  the  wages  received),  its  use  value  is  what  it  really 
earns. 

The  capitalist  makes  profit  by  buying  labor  at  its 
exchange  value  and  then  making  its  use  value  produce 
more  wealth  than  is  paid  for  the  laborer's  exchange 
value,  i.  e.,  the  capitalist  pays  to  labor  in  wages  less 
than  the  commodities  sell  for,  and  this  being  the  case, 
it  is  evident  that  the  more  productive  labor  becomes 
(by  using  improved  machinery,  etc.),  the  larger  will  be 
the  pirofits;  for  it  must  be  remembered  that  labor  is 
patiid  in  wages,  not  in  products. 

It  is  the  incorporating  of  labor  into  commodities 
that  increases  value;  for  instance,  a  coat  is  worth 
more  than  the  materials  of  which  it  is  made,  yet  all 

that  has  been  added  is  the  labor  of  the  tailor. 

Of  course  there  are  various  kinds  of  laboi*,  for  in- 
stance, a  shoe  made  in  a  factory  has  embodied  in  it  the 
labor  of  thousands  of  men.  Men  who  handle  cattle, 
tanners,  bark  dealers,  railway  men,  coal  miners,  store- 
keepers, tool-makers,  etc.  etc.  The  work  of  these  men 
is  different  in  quality,  but  its  quantity  is  all  embodied 
in  the  product  and  gives  it  value;  thus  value  is  simply 
crystalized  labo'r  in  the  abstract,  of  course  the  labor 
must  be  expended  on  something  socially  useful  or  it 
will  not  create  exchange  value. 

It  is  of  great  importance  not  only  to  know  the  fore- 
going definitions,  but  to  grasp  their  significance. 

If  what  the  laborers  receive  is  determined  not    by 


38 

what  they  produce  but  by  tlie  exchange  value  of  labor, 
it  follows  that  no  tampering  with  Protective  tariffs  or 
money  or  taxes  can  help  the  laborer  to  get  more  of  his 
product;  that  questions  of  tariff,  free  trade,  money, 
taxes,  etc.,  do  not  concern  workingmen  but  capitalists 
only.  The  competitiom  of  the  unemployed  will  keep 
wages  down,  no  matter  what  the  system  o'f  Tariff  or 
taxation  may  be. 

If  labor  alone  creates  value,  then  it  follows  that  idle 
profit  takers  are  superfluous,  that  only  workers  are 
necessary  to  supply  the  needs  of  society. 

If  profit  is  simply  the  fleecings  from  the  laborers 
then  the  claim  that  the  capitalist  creates  the  surplus 
value  by  exchange  or  by  his  enterprise,  abstinence, 
etc.,  is  an  absurd  mis-statement. 

The  fact  that  the  capitalists  by  forming  monopolies, 
trusts,  etc.,  sometimes  increase  the  price,  does  not 
alter  the  fact  that  the  ratio  of  exchange  is  determined 
by  the  amount  of  socially  necessary  labor  embodied  in 
the  commodity,  for  so  soon  as  large  profits  are  being 
made,  competitors  spring  up,  or  if  the  monopoly  is  too 
extortionate,  it  will  destroy  its  sales,  or  other  things 
will  be  used,  as  oil  instead  of  gas,  or  acetyline  or 
candles  instead  of  oil,  etc.  As  an  actual  matter  of  fact 
trusts  do  not  usually  increase  prices,  they  increase 
I>rofits  princii)ally  by  reducing  cost  of  production,  but 
in  speaking  of  exchange  value  we  must  not  take  ex- 
ceptional cases  but  the  general  average,  and  it  will  be 
found  that  -over  long  periods  the  general  average  ex- 
change value  of  commodities  will  be  in  ratio  to  the 
amount  of  socially  necessary  labor  time  embodied  in 
them. 

The  value  of  a  commoditv  would  remain  constant  if 


39 

the  labor  time  required  for  its  production  also  re- 
mained constant;  but  the  latter  changes  with  every 
vanation  in  the  productiveness  of  labor. 

Marx  points  out  that  the  constant  part  of  capital 
(ais  distinct  from  capital  spent  in  wages)  must  of  nec- 
essity by  the  law  of  competition,  inevitably  increr.ov^' 
in  amount  and  thus  lower  the  rate  of  profit,  thoUfeli 
not  its  absolute  amount. 

SUMMARY     OF     THE     FACTS     OF     SCIENTIFIC 

SOCIALISM. 

We  will  now  briefly  re-state  the  facts  and  inferences 
from  which  the  conclusions  of  Scientific  Socialism  are 

drawn. 

The  fact  that  in  any  society  a  change  in  the  mode 

of  economic  production  and  exchange  has  always  been 

followed  by  a  change    in    the    social,    political    and 

juridical  institutions  of  that  Society. 

The  fact  that  Society  is  an  organism. 

That  men's  characters  are  moulded  by  their  environ- 
ment. 

That  the  laws  and  ideas  of  rights,  morals,  justice, 
so-called  divine  rights  to  property,  titles,  etc.,  at  any 
time  prevailing,  are  merely  the  dictates  of  the  tTien 
ruling  class. 

That  capitalistic  exploitation  and  not  scarcity  of 
products  or  means  of  production  is  the  cause  of  the 
poverty  of  the  working  class. 

That  only  by  gaining  the  political  power  can  a  lower 
class  emancipate  itself  from  its  'subjection  to  the 
ruling  class. 

That  political  power  can  be  gained  only  by  a  class 
conscious  movement. 

That  there  is  a  class  struggle. 


40 

That  there  is  an  evolution  in  industrial  methods. 

That  we  now  have  a  system  of  social  production 
which  conflicts  with  the  existing  individual  appropri- 
ation of  the  products  of  social  labor. 

The  fact  that  as  the  expansion  of  the  markets  can- 
not keep  pace  with  the  expansion  of  production,  a 
crash  becomes  inevitable. 

That  labor  alone  creates  value. 

That  the  capitalists  by  becoming  mere  profit  taker* 
without  any  useful  function  in  industry,  render  them- 
selves no  longer  necessary  as  a  class  in  Society. 

That  the  gigantic  organization  of  industries,  by 
crushing  out  the  middle  class  and  rendering  capita- 
lists superfluous,  leaves  but  one  successor  to  the  politi- 
cal power,  viz.,  the  working  class;  thiat  therefore  the 
future  belongs  to  the  working  class. 

That  the  woirking  class  in  order  to  rule,  must  estab- 
lish social  ownership  of  the  meams  of  production,  to- 
gether with  a  system  of  equal  rights  and  duties  to 
conform  to  the  system  of  social  production. 

That  a  Grovernment  of  the  workers,  by  the  workers, 
with  worker's  laws  would  involve  a  co-operative 
commonwealth. 

From  the  foregoing,  it  will  be  seen  that  Scientific 
Socialism  is  simply  an  interpretation  of  economic 
phenomena,  a  philosophy  based  upon  the  facts  of  his- 
tory. 

It  is  true  that  the  facts  and  inductions  of  Scientific 
Socialism  may  be  questioned,  but  notwithstanding 
the  numerous  fierce  attacks  made  upon  them,  they 
have  not  been  successfully  refuted;  in  fact,  so  in- 
vulnerable are  they,  that  a  plain  workingman,  armed 
with  the  knowledge  of  the  fundamental  principles  of 


41 

Scientific  Socialism  can  easily  defeat  the  most  learned 
University  professor  wbo  attacks  them;  the  writer 
knows  of  several  cases  in  which  professors  were  un- 
able to  hold  their  own  in  argument  with  Socialist  work- 
ing men,  in  one  case  the  professor  was  a  scientist  of  in- 
ternational reputation.  The  fact  is,  no  man  can  suc- 
cessfully defend  error  against  an  opponent  who  iis 
fairly  bright  and  acquainted  with  the  facts,  and  when 
capitalist  apologists  attempt  to  prove  that  Drones  and 
Parasites  are  public  benefactors  and  that  value  is 
created  by  the  mere  process  of  buying  and  selling  ot 
by  the  abstinence  of  the  capitalist,  it  is  lan  easy  miatter 
to  expose  the  ludicrous  nature  of  their  arguments. 

The  trouble  with  most  anti-Socialists  is  that  they 
entirely  overlook  industinal  evolution,  they  imagine 
that  Socialism  is  a  scheme  or  method  that  we  can 
adopt  or  reject,  just  as  we  choose;  they  do  n/ot  grasp 
the  fact  that  ''it  i8  a  condition  and  not  a  theory  that 
confronts  us.''  The  possession  of  all  the  wealth  by  a 
few  men,  the  crushing  out  of  the  middle  class,  the 
destitute  condition  of  millions  of  propertiless  working- 
men;  this  is  the  condition,  and  a  very  few  years  from 
now,  the  question  before  us  will  not  be,  "Is  So'cialism 
s,  perfect,  an  absolutely  flawless  system?  but,' What  are 
we  going  to  do  about  it?  How  can  we  live  unless  we 
establish  Socialism?" 

To  those  who  desire  to  thoroughly  u^nderstand  Scien- 
tific Socialism,  the  writer  earnestly  recommends  the 
reading  of  The  Oommunist  Manifesto,  by  Marx  and 
Engels,  Socialism  fro'm  Utopia  to  Science,  by  Fredk. 
Engels  and  "Capital"  by  Karl  Marx.  The  reading  of 
these  masterpieces  will  soon  dispel  the  idea  that  So- 
cialism is  Utopian  or  anarchistic. 


42 

Anarchists  are  the  worst  enemies  of  the  Socialist 
movement;  they  cast  odium  upon  it;  they  confuse  the 
workers  and  retard  their  organization.  By  denying 
that  the  workers  can  emancipate  themselves  only  by 
a  class  conscious  political  movement;  by  denying  that 
society  is  an  organism ;  and  by  maintaining  that  emanci- 
pation is  to  be  gained,  not  by  a  class  struggle,  but 
by  individual  action,  anarchists  prove  themiselves  to 
be  either  grossly  ignorant  and  illogical  or  else  the  al- 
lies and  willing  to'ols  of  the  capitalists;  they  endeavor 
to  perpetuate  the  eapitalist  system  by  throwing  dust 
in  the  eyes  of  the  workers  while  the  capitalists  rob 
them. 

The  arguments  and  tactics  of  Christian  Socialists, 
Theosophists,  Single  Taxers,  etc.,  all  tend  to  coinfuse 
and  mislead  the  workers. 

The  real  socialist  movement  springs  from  material 
conditions,  not  i>erso-ual  conceptions,  and  it  advances 
on  lines  dictated  by  economic  evolution  and  the  teach- 
ings of  history;  the  evolutionary  nature  of  Socialism 
is  shown  by  its  spontaneous  growth  in  all  countries 
where  the  capitalist  system  prevails. 

Social  changes  are  dependent  neither  upon  ethical 
teaching,  nor  upon  all  the  people  being  educated;  for 
men  driven  by  necessity  do  not  bother  about  rights, 
justice,  morals,  etc.,  and  starving  men  will  (if  suffi- 
ciently num(MOus)  force  the  ruling  class  to  make 
changes,  on  pain  of  a  revolution,  probably  bloody  and 
terrible,  like  that  of  the  French  of  1789. 

Nor  does  the  advent  of  a  Socialist  system  depend 
upon  all  Ihe  workers  understanding  Socialist  prin- 
ciples; when  a  sufficient  number  vote  for  Socialism,  it 
will  romjvel  the  capitalist  parties  (Republican,  Demo- 


43 

cratic  a^nd  Populist),  to  fo'rm  themselves  Into  one 
party,  in  order  to  keep  the  Siocialists  out  of  power; 
there  will  then  be  only  two  parties;  a  capitalist  party 
and  a  Socialist  party;  this  will  simplify  matters  for  the 
workingmen,  for  though  they  may  mot  understand  So- 
cialism, they  will  soon  understand  that  the  labor  party 
isopposed  to  their  enemies,  the  capitalists,  and  they  will 
vote  and  aict  accordingly;  and  each  year  as  the  Siocdial- 
ist  vote  rises  higher  and  higher,  the  capitalist  party 
will  endeavor  to  stem  the  tide  of  Socialism,  by  offer- 
ing sops  in  the  shape  of  national  ownership  of  rail- 
ways, etc.,  eight  hour  work  day,  initiative  and  referen- 
dum, etc.  Thus  the  person  who  attaches  importance 
to  these  measures  will  find  it  pays  better  to  vote  a 
radical  Socialist  ticket  than  a  middle  clasis  party  tick- 
et, foT  there  is  nothing  like  a  big  Soicialist  vote  to  scare 
Ihe  capitalists  into  granting  palliatives. 

It  is  the  tendency  of  the  lower  classes  to  tolerate 
bad  conditions,  so  long  as  existence  is  possible,  but 
when  an  economic  system  will  no  longer  enable  them 
to  live,  they  are  compelled  to  combine  and  change  it; 
a  class  can  be  made  to  think  and  act  on  political  lines 
only  when  forced  by  economic  necessity,  but  all  eco- 
nomic class  interests  ai^  bound  sooner  or  later  to  ex- 
press themselves  politically. 

Socialism  will  come  as  a  result  of  discontent  with 
bad  economic  conditions;  it  will  come  when  the  work- 
ers see  that  they  can  save  themselves  from  exploita- 
tion only  by  abolishing  the  private  ownership  of  the 
means  of  living;  that  is,  they  must  abolish  the  capital- 
ist system;  and  as  the  adoption  of  any  other  than  the 
Socialist  system  would  be  just  simply  changing  the 
burden  from  one  shoulder  to  the  other,  the  ^^orking 


44 

class  will  be  compelled,  in  order  to  completely  emanci- 
pate itself,  to  establish  the  co-operative  common- 
wealth, in  which  the  mearns  of  production  cease  to  be 
private  property  and  become  social  property;  "the 
economic  development  itself,  with  its  gigantic  produc- 
tive machinery  and  its  great  nationally  organized  in- 
dustries, is  sure  to  render  abortive  all  attempts  to 
move  in  a  direction  different  to  Socialism." 

Some  so-called  Socialists  (who  imagine  themselves 
\ory  practical)  ridicule  the  idea  of  the  co-operative 
commonwealth;  by  so  doing  they  prove  themselves  un- 
scientific, for  while  it  is  true  thiat  Socialism  is  not  a 
Utopian  scheme,  with  every  detail  planned  out,  it  is 
also  true  that  in  order  to  emancipate  itself,  the  work- 
ing class  will  be  compelled  to  establish  social  owner- 
ship of  the  means  of  production;  and  it  is  very  evident 
that  this  will  result  in  short  hours  of  labor,  pure  food, 
good  homes,  a  freer  social  intercourse,  and  eventually 
to  as  happy  conditioii'S  as  were  ever  dreamt  of  by 
Utopians. 

Enough  has  probably  been  written  to  prove  that 
scienitific  Socialists  ARE  NOT  AIMING  AT  DIVID- 
ING UP,  OR  AT  A  PERIODICAL  RE  DISTRIBU- 
TION OF  PROPERTY,  or  at  FOUNDING  CO-OPER- 
.kTIVE  COLONIES  IN  THE  BACKWOODS;  only  by 
a  complete  monopoly  of  all  industries  can  oo-operation 
De  made  a  success. 

Scientific  Socialism  teaches  thiat  the  Socialist  move- 
ment can  advance  omly  on  the  lines  dictated  by  econ- 
omic evolution;  that  economic  evolution  by  de- 
veloping a  social  method  of  economic  piro- 
duction,  has  prepared  the  economic  basis  of  the 
Socialist    system,    and    all    that    is    now    neoessairy 


45 

is  to  oirganize  the  wot*kers  for  the  capture  of  thie  poiliti- 
oal  power.  The  working  class  is  destined  to  be  the 
ruling  class.  The  duty  of  Socialists  thetrefore  is  to 
help  evolution  by  making  the  workers  comsciioius  of 
their  destiny,  and  by  dissieminafting  such  sound 
doctrines  that  the  workers  w^ill  be  prepared  for  the 
part  they  the  destined  to  play. 

To  all  such  questions  as,  Whether  the  present  mar- 
riage relations  and  religious  institutions  will  'be  main- 
tained, under  Socialism?  or.  Whether  the  capitalists 
will  be  compensated  for  the  seizure  of  their  property? 
Socialists  can  return  but  one  answer,  viz.,  they  do  not 
know;  the  future  alone  will  answer  such  questions; 
but  in  reply  to  the  question  regarding  compensation, 
we  might  ask,  Does  the  successful  capitalist  compen- 
sate the  rival  whose  business  and  prospects  he  has 
ruined  ? 

In  conclusion,  let  me  say  that  the  most  important 
Socialist  doctrine  to  remember,  is : 

THAT  THE  WORKING  CLASS  CAN  EMANCI- 
PATE ITSELF  ONLY  BY  A  CLASS  CONSCIOUS 
MOA'EMENT  AND  THE  CAPTURE  OF  THE  POLIT- 
ICAL POWER. 

REMONSTRANCE. 

To  youthful  minds  how  bright  the  future  seems; 
With  what  gay  thoughts     Hope's    flow'ry     pathway 

i  eems ; 
What  dreams  of  Joy  and  Love  and  Wealth  and  Fame, 
What  grand  ideals,  what  confidence  of  aim. 
What  freedom  from  tormenting  doubts  and  fears 


46 

And  worry's  cruel  pangs,  and  cares,  and  tears. 

But  as  the  yeam  roll  by,  how  callous  truth 

Dispels  the  phantasies  and  dreams  of  youth; 

Each  fleeting-  year  sees  aims  and  plans  prove  void 

And  hopes  by  failure's  blighting  touch  destroyed. 

While  irksome  toil  and  souring  business  strife 

Unmask  the  stern  realities  of  life. 

Each  year  that's  passed  at  plow  oir  desk  or  mill 

Sees  hofpe  and  aiini  sink  lower,  lower,  till 

At  last  we  dream  no  more  of  wealth  and  fame 

And  "steady  work"  becomes  our  highest  aim. 

And  oft  men  find  in  crime,  a  last  resort, 

When  want  incites  and  work  is  vainly  sought. 

Oh!  what  a  Hell  it  is  to  beg  for  work 

And  meet  with  sneer  or  condescending  smirk. 

To  have  our  wives  and  babes  dejx^nd  for  food 

Upon  employer's  whim  or  changing  mood 

To  sink  all  pride,  all  manly  feelings  down 

And  cringe,  lest  we  incur  a  mastcT's  frown. 

What  bitter  thoughts  such  slavery  inspires 

What  torture,  what  ungratifled  desires 

To  yearn  for  foreign  lands  and  men  to  see 

And  boobs  and  art  and  nature's  forest  free. 

Yet  be  condemned  to  ceaseless  toil  and  grind. 

To  stifle  every  yearning  of  the  mind. 

Oh  I  pause  and  think,  my  toilimg  fellow  man. 

Can  you  conceive  no  other,  better  pilan. 

Than  this,  which  makes  us  lifelong  wretched  slaves 

To  idle  plutocrats  and  scheming  knaves? 

Is  this  the  only  way  foir  man  to  live? 

MUST  we,  to  drones,  our  labor  always  give? 

Oh!  fellow  toiler  think,  is  it  not  strange? 

That  science-gifted  man  should  so  arrange 


47 

His  life,  that  lie  must  drudge  the  lifelong  day 
While  e'en  the  lowest  brutes  find  hours  to  play? 
For  minutes  spent  to  get  sabsistence. 
YOIT  sell  your  freedom  for  a  pretty  speech 
And  never  learn  what  e'en  the  brutes  can  teach 
Your  mind,  to  ev'ry  superstition  tied. 
Lets  enemies  your  thoug'hts  and  actions  guide. 
Bare  needs  of  life  are  all  you  get  at  best, 
No  time  nor  means  for  pleasure  nor  for  rest. 
No  light,  no  joy,  no  hope,  but  in  the  grave, 
Yet  deem  it  right;  YOU  ARE  INDEED  A  SLAVE. 
Oh  man,  what  can  we  say,  what  can  we  write, 
To  flood  your  darkened  reason  with  the  llg'ht? 
Can  searching  pen  nor  bold  impassioned  speech. 
Nor  pain  nor  scathing  scorn,  yoair  dark  mind  reach. 
Can  logic,  reason,  truth  and  common  sense 
Arouse  nought  in  thee  but  a  coarse  offence? 
Can  burning  eloquence  no  thoughts  inspire, 
Nor  plain  self  int'i'est  force  thee  to  inquire — 
What  is  the  cause? 

THOMAS  BERSFORD. 


48 

READ!     READ! 

p^iA^t»         j^  PHILOSOPHY  OF  HAPPINESS. 
S>-^  (By  Thomas  Bersford.) 

"As  the  field  of  knowledge  is  a  limitless  tract,  with 
l>aths  too  numerous  to  traverse  in  o^ne  brief  life,  I  be- 
lieve that  the  wisest  philosopher  is  he  who  se-arches 
for  the  materially  useful  and  avoids  the  allurements 
and  brilliant  inanities  of  metaphysical  speculation, 
Vv'ho  prefers  simple  inductions  from  facts  to  elaborate 
theories  based  upon  abstractions  and  permits  no  senti- 
ment or  prejudice  to  intluenee  his  reasoning.  Certain- 
ly, that  man  is  a  bigot  who  refuses  to  abandon  a  be- 
lief or  a  sj^stem  when  proved  at  variance  with  science 
and  truth." — ^Tbos.  Bersford,  in  A  Philosophy  of  Hap- 
•   pineS'S. 

"A  book  that  should  cause  even  the  dullest  to  re- 
flect."—S.  F.  Class  Struggle. 

"A  book  that  is  well  worth  reading ;  it  is  a  very  good 
quarry  for  speakers." — N.  Y.  People. 

"Its  object  is  to  equip  the  revolters  with  the  philoso- 
phy which  has  been  so  long  prostituted  to  the  service 
01  economic  tyranny." — The  Toosin. 

•'We  think  it  one  of  the  most  effective  propaganda 
books  ever  published."— The  S.  F.  Tageblatt. 

Price,  post  paid,  10  Cents. 
See  Address. 


The  People 

itional  Official  Organ  of   the  Socialist  Labor  Party.     Pub- 
lished Weekly  at  184  William  St.,  New  York,  N.  Y. 
Subscription:  6  Months,  25  Cents:  One  Year  50  Cents. 


The  Class  Struggle 

Official  Organ  of  the  S.  L.  P.  for  the  State  of  California.     Pub« 

lished  Weekly  at  117  Turk  St.,  San  Francisco. 

Subscription:  6  Monthe,  25  Cents;  One  Year,  50  Cents. 


The  Tocsin 


The  Northwestern  Advocate  of  the   Socialist   Labor  Party. 

Published  Weekly  at  412  North  Western  Bldg., 

Minn9apolis,  Minn. 

Subscription:  6  Months,  25  Cents;  One  Year,  50  Cents. 


Sample  copies  of  above  papers  may  be  obtained  free 
by  sending  addresses  to  the  respective  papers. 


IF  YOU  WANT  "FACTS" 

GET 

Bersford's  Derringer  Pocket-Book  of  Statistics. 

with  reliable  data  eompiled  espeoiialiy  for  the  use  of 
Socialists. 

All  persons  who  speak,  write  or  argue  on  Political 
and  economic  questions  will  find  this  pocket-book  In- 
valuable enabling  them  to  support  many  an  argument 
by  statistics  from  reliable  authcirities. 

Statistics  of  the  Populatioins,  Areas,  Votes,  date  of 
electi'ons,  etc.,  of  tlie  U.  S.  and  of  all  'the  leading  for- 
eign countries. 

Staitisti'cs  of  Money,  Wealth,  Bonds,  Gov't.  Revenue 
and  Expenditure,  etc. 

Startling  figures  showing  Mortgages,  concentration 
of  wealth,  concentration  of  industry.  Trusts,  Watered 
stocks.  Profits  and  jobberies  of  large  oorporations. 
Large  Land-holdings,  etc.  Displacement  of  labor  by 
machinery.  Female  amd  ch'ild  labor,  Strikes  Boycotts, 
Wages  and  prices  of  food,  etc.,  in  the  past  and  present 
in  the  United  States  and  other  countries. 

Statistics  of  murders,  suicddes,  lynchings,  criminals, 
prostitution,  tramps,  ]>aupers,  persions  killed  on  rail- 
ways, wars.  Religious,  etc.  Stati'stics  of  farm  and 
factory,  the  sweating  system  and  disease.  Figures 
showing  Labor's  share  of  its  product  and  the  work- 
men's chance  of  becoming  rich. 

Statistics  in  relation  to  the  Malthusian  doctrine. 
And  a  great  variety  of  facts  and  figures  of  use  to  per- 
sons who  study  or  debate  on  political  and  economic 
subjects. 

PRICE  (poist  paid)  15c. 

NEW  AND  MUCH  IMPROVED  EDITION  WILL 

BE  READY  ABOUT  MAY,  1899. 


